"(I) have been accepted at Liberty University to obtain a second doctorate."

When I initially read about his fabricated resume, I wondered if Pastor Flockhart was also lying about his enrollment at Liberty University. It seems The Palm Beach Post may have had similar questions. A reporter called to question Liberty's registrar's office about Flockhart's enrollment for a "second" doctorate. In an article published on August 26, 2006 The Palm Beach Post reported that the registrar's office initially said that they had never heard of Mr. Flockhart, but then they called the newspaper back later and said they had discovered that Flockhart was enrolled and had paid the registration fees directly to seminary President Ergun Caner. The paper then quoted a Liberty official:

"The pastor (Flockhart) is enrolled and has paid in advance," said Ron Godwin, executive vice president and CEO of Liberty University. He added, "I love those kind of students."

Granted, the Palm Beach Post could have misreported the initial response of Liberty, as well as the words of Ron Godwin, but the newspaper's published report caused many of us to ask several questions about what seemed to be a peculiar financial arrangement. While several of the financial questions were ultimately answered by Dr. Caner himself, there were two main questions that went unanswered at the time:

(1). Was Steven Flockhart enrolled in an actual doctorate program at Liberty University?(2). If so, what safeguards were in place to prevent Liberty from accepting a doctoral student who had fabricated degrees?

Though questions to our Christian leaders may bring some discomfort, asking them is not a bad thing. It is not attacking someone's character. It is not assuming someone is evil or wicked. It is a legimitate process through which we Christians can hold each other accountable.

For example, Darrell Gilyard was a rising star among Southern Baptists. He preached at Pastors' Conferences, including the Southern Baptist Pastors' Conference in Las Vegas, and his eloquence in the pulpit was unmatched. However, it was discovered that his story of growing up homeless, sleeping underneath bridges, and being converted to Christ out of the rough streets of Jacksonville was all a lie. Baptist Press reported that the Dallas Morning News, in an exclusive July 28, 1991 story, reported that:

Gilyard actually was brought up in a comfortable north Florida home by a woman who reared him as if he were her son. The article included an interview with Barbara Davis, the 65-year-old Palatka woman who said she helped to rear Gilyard from age 8 months until he left home at age 19. The paper also reported Gilyard misrepresented his academic background; accepted a $10,000 "love offering" from Falwell's ministry under false pretenses; and lied about repeated traffic offenses and a suspended drivers license in Florida.

Gilyard is now in prison, not for lying, but for multiple sexual crimes. One wonders why Southern Baptists never asked the tough questions of Darrell Gilyard while he was a Southern Baptist and before he became involved in criminal behavior? Why does the secular press have to do what we ourselves seemed unwilling to do?

It's not hard for anyone to find story after story about Baptist pastors who have lied about their past. Baptist youth pastor Randy Lee Morrow lied about being in a biker gang. He lied about serving prison time. He lied about having terminal cancer. "I lied a lot more than I should have," he says. Why was there nobody asking the tough questions of Randy Lee Morrow?

Now some Christians are asking tough questions to Ergun Caner about the representations he has made to others about his past. These questions are not accusations--they are legitimate queries of a Christian brother to ensure accountability and integrity of Christian ministry. To ask them is not to accuse. To not ask them, however, is inexcusable--particularly when the words spoken publicly are those of Dr. Caner himself. There are some bloggers, like Peter Lumpkins, Tim Guthrie, and others who personally blister anyone who asks tough questions of Dr. Caner. One of these days they will learn that attacking the character of those who ask legitimate, tough questions of our leaders will only ultimately backfire on their intended purpose.

91 comments:

It seems for some you simply can not ask questions. They will prepare a comment but you are not allowed to interact with the comment. I just do not think if they were on the other side they would like it one bit at all.

Peter Lumkpkins and TG and others come across as attackers of others just because they question someone they hold near and dear.

It is not unchristian to ask legitimate questions. Will these people ever learn.

And one more brief comment... This post brings up one of the reasons I so appreciate Wade Bulreson. I can publicly question him - my own pastor - and even disagree with his answers, and yet our friendship remains strong and growing. I couldn't really fellowship with a man who could not or would not be reasonably scrutinized, let alone "follow" him. I appreciate leaders who are available and open.

Wade: its very simple. It boils down to accountability. These rock star mega church pastors/celebrities don't want to be accountable to anyone. Only to God.

Ed Young, Jr. - his defense on the airplane is that he is accountable to God, so he will not tell his congregation or the news reporters the terms of the jet lease arrangements. Even John Cross, one of his trustees, and Florida Baptist Convention President defended the jet lease said the same: we pastors are accountable to God to how we spend the money, so you can all stop asking the questions.

Mac Brunson, one of Caner's best friends and coauthor with Caner - doesn't want to be held accountable for his words. He lied about Sheri Klouda's testimony, completely mischaracterizing it, from his pulpit, and he never apologized to Klouda or to his congregation. Brunson calls me a sociopath and mentally unstable in the newspaper, he never apologizes for it: he just quotes scripture and says he is charged with protecting the flock, and he gets a standing ovation from his church. I blogged in 2008 also about how his sermon stories presented as historical facts were very broad and loose stretches of the truth. Just one week before his trustees delivered their famous "Deacon's resolution" condemning my blog, Brunson told his congregation that the way you respond to people who ask questions and cause trouble in the church is to "shut 'em down". They don't like questioners.

So the trustees of their churches don't hold them accountable. Their staff members are no source of accountability - they will be fired if they don't get in line - and when the do get out of line they are required to sign confidentiality agreements in exchange for their severence pay - so no one can say anything after they leave and still find employment in the SBC.

Hence, why these men in the SBC fear bloggers. They can't control the bloggers. They can't shut 'em down. They can't control the message. They can't issue trespass papers to keep them away from their church members.

But apparently Caner overstepped a boundary in the SBC. You can't call someone with the integrity of Jerry Rankin a liar and not have to eat crow. Lie about a seminary professor from the pulpit, call a pesky blogger a sociopath in the media: that's fine. But somebody DID hold Caner accountable apparently. I don't think Caner would have apologized unless his butt was on the line - maybe the trustees at Liberty or Jon Falwell himself. Caner's schtick on the preaching circuit is one of being offensive and offending...but he went too far this time and unbelievably, someone did hold him accountable.

But its all good, as he apologized and the SBC Today gang ate it up and congratulated him for being such a wonderful godly man for apologizing.

Maybe someday Caner will apologize to our black brothers for his offensive remarks in Jacksonville last year about their churches where there take the collection multiple times to get the money they need, their ladies where hats as big as satellite dishes with a curtain rod down the front, and the men who wear suits that match their shoes and their cars.

It has been my observation that sometimes questions are asked in the course of a search for church staff members, but their former churches are not always particularly forthcoming. How do we deal with that?

Dr. Kear, With the right to question, did you question Dr. Burleson yesterday concerning his slander concerning his perceptions of ineptitude in his staff memebrs at the church?

WB said:"Don't get me started on our "new" website. From our former staff member who couldn't get it done, to our $10,000 outside company who botched it completely, to our current in house multiple staff effort, we are really struggling."

I don't know if anyone noticed, but in Peter's attempt to discredit James White, he linked to a blog of James' sister as she agonized over telling James that their father had repeatedly sexually molested her. The pain, the trauma and the emotion of having to reveal such a sordid thing is vividly felt in her writing.

However, in order to seek to discredit James as an "obssessive, misguided and poor man" while linking to his sisters' trauma of sexual abuse at the hands of their father is, for lack of a better term, absolutely disgusting. I am embarrassed for Peter.

"we pastors are accountable to God to how we spend the money, so you can all stop asking the questions."

Note how this perception presumes they are a mediator between the congregation and Jesus Christ. As if God speaks to them only about the church. Scary stuff. many folks actually buy this. It is nothing less than laziness to follow a pastor a like that.

However, in order to seek to discredit James as an "obssessive, misguided and poor man" while linking to his sisters' trauma of sexual abuse at the hands of their father is, for lack of a better term, absolutely disgusting. I am embarrassed for Peter.

Fri Feb 26, 06:21:00 PM 2010

Anyone who has been around these types up close and personal knows how they operate. It is all political and to discredit those asking hard questions they have go all out to destroy them.

This is one reason I would never support the current leadership structure of the SBC. It is like giving money to perpetuate evil because this is how they operate. It is where these guys learned it.

I want no part of that. I know what they do to people. All in the Name of Jesus Christ which mocks our Savior.

Cautionary Note: If anyone clicks on the earlier post by Peter Lumpkins about this episodes, please be careful. Some of the links are infected. Or more accurately one site examinethetruth.com is infected.

Cautionary Note: If anyone clicks on the earlier post by Peter Lumpkins about this episodes, please be careful. Some of the links are infected. Or more accurately one site examinethetruth.com is infected.

I blogged on the Caner situation this week and commented on a few blogs which were doing the same. Interesting how the wagons were circled and it was turned into a "Traditional Baptist vs. Calvinist" issue rather than a matter of integrity. I trust my posting on the matter was fair and balanced, but it didn't seek to side-step the questions which need to be asked and answered.

Art Sippo, Steve Ray, Dave Armstrong. If you're really interested, a cursory search of any of their sites will get there easily. I'm not linking to anything else on the topic. The names should be sufficient. It's also been discussed on the Catholic Answers forums many times.

It's been referenced so often that it's hard to miss in a cursory google search :)

I have debated posting this link. But I shall do so for these reasons. I am not taking side in these issues. But I believe in the story Patricia Ann White Bonds. It is very sad, but Truth must be read and embraced. I am proud of her recovery, healing and acceptance in Catholic faith.

Pastor Wade: None. It is just the story was sad, but filled with hope. I did not take the link to have anything to do with Dr. Caner or even Dr. White. All families have problems. But I found hope in Patricia's post.

Pastor Wade, I agree. I did not agree with Peter Lumpkins attempt to tarnish Dr. White. I am providing a feedjit tracker link, that shows the originating posts that take you to Patricia's post. From my reading most of the posts "motive" in linking is suspect.

But I am not sure what it has to do with whether Caner grew up in Turkey or not. Or what it has to do with the supposed 61 debates he has had but there is no record of anywhere. And other questions that were not really answered by him on his statement.

This is off topic, but might be a "grace infusion" to the otherwise depressing comment stream. I am so passionate about catechetical instruction that these songs are a joy to me as I hear children learning such great, wonderful and ancient truths:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRcnd9JV9LI

Because you know of my life and ministry well you understand that I've personally seen and worked with families coming through the pain of sexual abuse and it is never a pretty picture. What I'm about to say IS of a general nature NOT in regards to ANY specific situation.

The victims of such are to be supported and that is generally through receiving the truth of it no matter the pain it might cause on facing the hurt another loved one has caused.

The perpetrator.. and any adult who stands by allowing it.. are the guilty ones in such things not the victim.

That said, I've seen the struggle some of those who find out about it late have in believing/accepting that it is truth. This is especially true when the perpetrator is one loved and/or admired for years.

I have found the best policy is to recognize time is needed by all in a family and grace and love are to be extended to, certainly the victims, but also to family members who struggle with the truth of it.

There have been some cases where it was found to be fabricated. Generally however, family members come to grips with the reality of it, albeit late. Sometimes they never do.

I have found this to be one of the more painful times ever for a family. Judgment on the part of outsiders is the LAST thing needed here.

The link on the blog mentioned in your post is certainly graceless if not evil in my opinion. [Maybe graceless and evil are synonymous in the real world.]

Wade, good post. I cannot help but often think that some in the SBC are more concerned with image than truth. And with that said, I cannot get out of my mind this article about the Beijing scandal of the incredible singing girl that actually didn't.

"Too busy waging war to realize that anyone who takes an honest look at history can see that the Catholic Church IS the Church. That everything else is a perversion of what had always been and what was delivered by mouth to the Apostles. No honest person of integrity and intellect can look at history and not see this."

Looks like I'll have to join James White on this one and plead guilty to being stupid, and having no integrity. Not to mention believing a perversion of the Gospel. There is so much in that post that could be commented on but I'll leave it be. So much irony in comments.

Looks like I'll have to join James White on this one and plead guilty to being stupid, and having no integrity. Not to mention believing a perversion of the Gospel. There is so much in that post that could be commented on but I'll leave it be. So much irony in comments.

Sat Feb 27, 09:42:00 PM 2010

My guess is her conversion is less about doctrine than it looks. After listening to victims of sexual molestation who have been hauled before elders and spiritually abused, I am surprised she is not a moonie selling flowers at the airport

There is a lot of pain in Patricia's religious comment. The jist of it was 'why can't they understand ?'. Perhaps she was really directing that question at her family, with regard to their rejection of her as an abuse victim? I think it was her pain, over not being acknowledged and understood by the family, that must have spilled over into her religious comment. My opinion only of course, and I am so often more wrong than right.

Paul is right: judgment from outsiders can only add to their pain.

How much better for those of all denominations who care, to pray to the Lord for the healing of this family's suffering? He alone can heal the wounds that lie too deep even to feel.

I did not see where SBC Today, and Tim G blistered anyone at their blog. I simply read an explanation from E.G. I did not read the Lumpkins because he gets on my nerves big time, and is quite offensive in his writings.

THY PEACE has spoken truth about the Mystery of Christ: "I am simply amazed at the Grace of God. Only He can heal anything the world considers hopeless and beyond any remedy.

From the Book of Philippians, Ch. 4:"The Lord is near. 6 Do not worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus."

I took your advice and read Patricia's posts, and although I don't agree with all of her political commentary, when I read what she wrote about some broken people, I did find one very beautiful quote:

"They gave the Lord what was left of their lives."

Ah. I hear that idea both from Catholics and from those of other denominations. Not so long ago, in a sermon, Wade read a poem by one of his congregation. I wish I had a copy of it. It spoke of how God can take the thousands of pieces of the shattered glass of our lives and mend us again. This theme of renewal in Christ is universal among Christian people. '. . . by His stripes, we are healed.'

Lydia, Because I assume someone is innocent until they are proven guilty. It's a great ideal try it sometime. A school teacher in my area was accused of sex with a student. Guess what after a year--after she resigned her position. The student was taped saying it never happened.

"Lydia, Because I assume someone is innocent until they are proven guilty."

I agree with that. But it makes it a bit hard when it is daddy, you are 10 and mommy turns a blind eye. How does a 10 year old even get an investigation? Who will believe her? You? Obviously not. (You better rethink that as a pastor. But what does it matter? It is only a female kid. They don't tithe anyway but their daddy might)

By the time they are adults and can deal with it, everyone can say they are delusional.

We found that out the hard way at BBC, didn't we. But ignoring the fact that Gaines kept on a pedophile minister on staff certainly did not put a damper on his speaking engagements or popularity with the SBC leadership, did it?

But thanks, Jeff, for showing your ignorance about the serious problem of sexual molestation and incest. Your compassion is overwhelming.

By the way, if you read the whole series, it says her dad admitted having a unique relationship with her. But the conditions of having a relationship with her parents was to never mention it again.

I still stand by the principle that someone is innocent until proven guilty.

Sun Feb 28, 10:57:00 PM 2010

So, only a court decision will work for you in Christendom as a pastor?

I must pray for your congregation and that there are no little girl victims there now who think they might be able to trust you. Or adults who come to you when they are able to deal with the horrors of childhood molestation. I pray they get out of your church asap.

There would be no opportunity for investigation and possible repentance because you only deal with court decisions.

And I will pray that the Lord does not have to teach you compassion the hard way.

Lydia, I never said it had to be a court decision. You assume way too much about things. You do not know me so refrain from jumping to conclusions. I never said that there should not be investigations. I said I am not going to jump to conclusions because I operate from the position that someone is innocent until proven guilty. I am not going to trust something on a blog. Please refrain from assuming!!!

May I refer you to the writings of Christa Brown, where you will have an opportunity to understand another perspective? If you are a pastor, Christa's story may help you to understand many, many things. Give it a try.

Hey Jeff, I don't want you to feel judged for having an opinion that you believe is fair. I don't know your heart. I do know the standards for this type of crime/sin have to be different than just someone is innocent until proven guilty.

I believe Thy Peace and L's had a similar reaction to your thinking in this area that I share.Sexual molesters rarely allow witnesses when they prey on the innocent,the emotionally vulnerable,or adults who have been previously wounded. Children rarely have the emotional or verbal skills to understand, explain, or defend themselves. The longer they are ignored and not nurtured and protected... the harder the recovery can be. Sexual trauma can "freeze" development in so many areas of a person's life.

A sexual predator on the other hand is usually a practiced liar and master manipulator. The longer he gets by with his sin the bolder and more confident he becomes. Wouldn't you want to err on the side of protecting a victim rather than enabling a seasoned predator??? Don't you think he is more capable of protecting himself than the victim is?? Do you think a victims gets something out of telling the horrible, degrading, things they have been thru??? It's so much more comfortable to believe that "pastor" or "deacon" is what he claims to be than it is to hear and see the pain of someone who has been violated, wounded, and degraded.It's sad the "unchurched" respond to victims in a more loving and nonjudgemental way than Christians do. I've experienced that myself.

And Jeff...you say you know Christa's story of abuse b/c you know about her blog.I think your heart would break if you knew more about what she endured at the hands of her own minister. But she takes the hits over and over from people who want to defend and protect "the ministry" b/c she cares more about protecting the innocent than she does about her own comfort.

One victim many people have heard about had a baby with the same DNA as her pastor but even that wasn't "proof" enough for the people of the church. He continued to preach and didn't attempt to help with supporting his child until the victim finally petitioned the court.He only did what he had to do and what he was forced to be accountable for. So do we really put ALL the burden of proof on the one who has been wounded?? I've witnesses one of the "investigations" you speak about also. The predator is suspended with pay and given free council while victims are treated like the criminal. The innocent are not innocent in the eyes of those who judge them.

Isaac Barrow, "Avoid controversy at any cost," he says. "The truth contended for is not worth the passion expended upon it. The benefits of the victory do not atone for the prejudices aroused in the combat. Goodness and virtue may often consist with ignorance and error, seldom with strife and discord."

Richard Baxter, "Another fatal hindrance," he said, "to a heavenly walk and conversation is our too frequent disputes. A disputatious spirit is a sure sign of an unsanctified spirit. They are usually men least acquainted with the heavenly life who are the most violent disputers about the circumstantiality of religion. Yea, though you were sure that your opinions were true, yet when the chiefest of your zeal is turned to these things, the life of grace soon decays within. The least controverted truths are usually the most weighty and of most necessary and frequent use to our souls."

In my, perhaps faulty, opinion, if the leadership superstardom culture in the SBC was struck down we'd be a whole lot better for it. No one is above scrutiny...or at least they shouldn't be. Ask Governors of certain states if they are above accountability to the watchful public. How much more should spiritual leaders be held accountable for what they say, what they do, what they teach, etc.?

We don't need a good 'ol boy culture that slides pooh under the carpet. We need a gracious but truthful culture of righteousness.

Gently, and with grace, disagree. It's not a matter about "winning" or "losing." That doesn't even enter the picture. I am an inerrantist and make no apology for believing in an inspired, infallible text that is without error.

Lydia, I never said it had to be a court decision. You assume way too much about things. You do not know me so refrain from jumping to conclusions. I never said that there should not be investigations. I said I am not going to jump to conclusions because I operate from the position that someone is innocent until proven guilty. I am not going to trust something on a blog. Please refrain from assuming!!!

Sun Feb 28, 11:30:00 PM 2010

Sorry Jeff. I can only go by your drive by sound bite answers to a very complicated issue. I can only assume that is your view by what you write.

Funny how in salvation we are guilty until made "innocent" by repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

You're right, of course. We do need to be gracious when keeping fellow brothers and sisters accountable. We should also not entertain an accusation against an elder unless done so according to biblical guidelines...HOWEVER, if an accusation is found to be a reality (that is, the presence of grevious sin) then that elder is supposed to be sharply rebuked in the presence of all.

In other words, there comes a time for sharpness of voice...of direct questioning, etc.

Yeah, we are guilty as sinners, but one the other hand we are God so we do not have perfect knowledge.

Mon Mar 01, 05:22:00 PM 2010

I have no idea what that means in relation to the issue we were discussing. Since we are not God we should not listen to victims who claim they have been molested unless they can provide proof? Is that what you mean.

BTW: Who gets to decide if how questions are asked are God exhalting or not? The person being asked?

I personally dont get it, from day one it was drilled into my head, you never and I do mean never question leadership. You will, and I mean always will get the left foot of fellowship. So questioning is not, and never has been an option. A few other points try asking questions such as origins, literal / figurative aspects of scripture and you will also get the boot. The basic concept is to just not say anything. I mean we have so many clowns that cast out demons, heal the sick who then die, ask us to sow seeds of faith, and drone on about other complete tripe. The problem is that it wounds real people, who do not matter, but it does. It makes me weep, it should not but it does.

Accountability -- on a host of issues -- is something that drew me toward a connectional/episcopal church governance (and that's different than being driven away from congregationalism). Now that I'm in The Episcopal Church, I have no desire to go back to congregationalism, regardless of its form because there is no guaranteed oversight or accountability. Each church does its own thing which means that a pastor can be in a position to run the show.

And oversight and accountability systems aren't always perfect or fail proof. I'd argue that Catholicism isn't known so much for abusive priests inasmuch as a failure of the oversight to do oversight. In The Episcopal Church we deposed a bishop who covered up that his brother was a sexual abuser.

I'd encourage people to look into series along the lines of "Safeguarding God's Children" which was put out by Church Pension Group, but there are similar counterparts in other denominations.

With the name of God, Peace be unto you. On the matter with Patricia Ann White Bonds she is a very amazing woman who is very brave and she is a sign of God. Many people will ask why did God allow this, but for Patricia she is still a believer! This is strong testimony.

Has anyone ever thought of the theological implications for James White that he would have to wrestle with as a Calvinist who believes in regeneration before faith if he accepts what Patricia says?

What does this say about his father and his eternal salvation? Would someone who was 'In Christ' before the foundation of the world be used as a tool to bring such evil to sister Patricia?

James has had to wrestle with it and not only it effecting his ministry (mind you the guy doesn't have any education besides Christian theological degrees). I mean if his ministry for example went down hill where would he work? Who employs a person with a Th.D these days?

I would like to challenge those who are supporters, friends, or even fans of Ergun Caner to outdo my defense of him, as can be found in the top four posts here: (link).

Notice the difference, of course, between defense of Caner and attack of the critics of Caner. Lumpkins in the latter category, trying to attack the critics, rather than trying to defend the man who is being criticized.